The challenging journey to floating: How did both the steering of the transition and COVID19 transform the domestic Forex Market in Africa?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47616/jamrems.v3i1.192Ключевые слова:
Exchange Rate, Monetary Policy, COVID19Аннотация
This article investigates the impacts of transition process steering and the COVID19 pandemic on domestic forex market behavior. To do so, we conducted a comparative analysis based on various GARCH family models and the case of four African countries which adopted different transition paths from fixed to intermediary and/or floating regimes. Our main empirical result is that smooth and gradual transition allows for a better adaptation of the domestic market actors, resulting in improved liquidity management and shocks absorption than countries with forced regime switch. We also notice a significant fallout from the COVID19 pandemic on economies where the regime transition was abrupt as the domestic forex market became more sensitive to endogenous factors. Finally, we presented critical policy implications and some suggestions for future studies.
Скачивания
Библиографические ссылки
Baillie, R. T., Boi|erslev, T., & Mikkelsen, H. O. (1996). Fractionally integrated generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. Journal of Econometrics, 3-30.
Bollerslev, T. (1986). Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. Journal of Econometrics, 31, 307-327.
Bonser-Neal, C. (1996). Does central bank intervention stabilize foreign exchange rates? Economic Review, 43-57.
Calvo, G. A., & Reinhart, C. M. (2002). Fear of Floating. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 379–408.
Dominguez, K. M., & Frankel, J. A. (1993). Does Foreign-Exchange Intervention Matter? The Portfolio Effect. The American Economic Review, 1356-1369.
Engle, R. (2002). Dynamic Conditional Correlation. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 339-350.
Hansen, P. R., & Lunde, A. (2005). A forecast comparison of volatility models: does anything beat a GARCH(1,1)? Journal of Applied Econometrics(20), 873–889.
IMF. (2014). Tunisia: IMF Country Report No. 14/277 . Washington, D.C: International Monetary Fund.
Miah, M., & Rahman, A. (2016). Modelling Volatility of Daily Stock Returns: Is GARCH(1,1) Enough? American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS), 18(1), 29-39.
Nugroho, D. B., Susanto, B., Prasetia, K. N., & Rorimpandey, R. (2019). Modeling of Returns Volatility using GARCH(1,1) Model under Tukey Transformations. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 21(1), 12-20.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Как цитировать
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Asian Multicultural Research for Economy and Management Study

Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution-ShareAlike» («Атрибуция — На тех же условиях») 4.0 Всемирная.


























